My biggest pet peeve right now is competitive MP, every match is essentially a one-sided steamroll. One side gets dominated beyond belief, while the other cleans up with ease (especially on the moon level with vehicles that have weapons). Usually by the time the match is over, one side has 20k points, while the other barely makes 5k (and most of the players have left by the end of the match, making things even worse for those that stuck around for the massacre).

Not sure if this is a map problem, player upgrades problem, weapon unbalance problem, or a problem with people squading up vs players who are all randoms. But it is pretty awful playing Crucible most of the time without a group of buddies who are all communicating and/or working together.

Also some of the weapons are just insanely OP, way too many one-hit wonders (at least against my Warlock). And it seems the heavier class, or heavily upgraded players, have a distinct advantage since they can soak up so much firepower. I have to hold my AR at full auto on most players for a good 3-4 seconds to take them down, while all it takes is for them is to simply look at me and I am dead. It's very frustrating. I don't have the exact number, but I believe I am sitting around 130 in defense and am a lower level 8 (still have quite a bit of upgrading to do with my weapons/armor/etc).

About the only things I don't like with the beta so far is the PvP and that the guns quite often don't reload when you are moving around. Other than that I haven't found much that I don't like about the game so far.

Good description. I guess it's easy to confuse that first big number as the damage amount, it's basically the weapon lvl, impact and rate of fire is going to determine max damage over time for a weapon. Weapon lvl is going to have the effect of possibly having reduced effectiveness against higher lvl mobs.

That's why the Knights that are down in the tunnel not to far from Russia drop in zone are immune to our weapon fire.

I don't misunderstand, that's exactly what I thought it was. Unless they make enemy Armor much higher, no weapon will really feel powerful compared to another. A 500 attack weapon will do just as much as a 50 attack weapon against low level content. Higher level weapons should have a little more impact every so many levels.

I get it, but I dislike it.

Originally Posted by Sparc

For goodness sake I hope nobody thinks to start labelling the console an Xbrick,
oops

I don't misunderstand, that's exactly what I thought it was. Unless they make enemy Armor much higher, no weapon will really feel powerful compared to another. A 500 attack weapon will do just as much as a 50 attack weapon against low level content. Higher level weapons should have a little more impact every so many levels.

I get it, but I dislike it.

But that's exactly how it should work. Your weapon's 'power' doesn't come from the Attack rating at all. That's only how much of the weapon's power will apply to the unfortunate being on the receiving end. This is a pretty standard D&D kind of model. You need to modify your weapon to increase the damage dealing stats - predominantly Impact and RoF which will give you a DPS value.

Yes they do and the Crosshair is off centre, this seems to be a Bungie trademark these days unfortunately, it makes the weapon model situation look far worse than it is since you expect the cross hairs to be int he exact centre of the screen, butt hey are not, they are slightly below the centre.

Having off centre cross hairs would annoy the crap out of me, so I wouldn't buy this game knowing that now.

Yes they do and the Crosshair is off centre, this seems to be a Bungie trademark these days unfortunately, it makes the weapon model situation look far worse than it is since you expect the cross hairs to be int he exact centre of the screen, butt hey are not, they are slightly below the centre.

Having off centre cross hairs would annoy the crap out of me, so I wouldn't buy this game knowing that now.

Yes they do and the Crosshair is off centre, this seems to be a Bungie trademark these days unfortunately, it makes the weapon model situation look far worse than it is since you expect the cross hairs to be int he exact centre of the screen, butt hey are not, they are slightly below the centre.

Having off centre cross hairs would annoy the crap out of me, so I wouldn't buy this game knowing that now.

lol well spotted. I mean I've thrown a billion hours into the beta and also played the alpha and hadn't noticed at all until you pointed it out. Ah well, game is still great to play.

But that's exactly how it should work. Your weapon's 'power' doesn't come from the Attack rating at all. That's only how much of the weapon's power will apply to the unfortunate being on the receiving end. This is a pretty standard D&D kind of model. You need to modify your weapon to increase the damage dealing stats - predominantly Impact and RoF which will give you a DPS value.

But what I'm saying is the higher "level" "rank" or "attack" weapon, whatever you want to call it SHOULD deal slightly more damage even if they're both well over the target enemies defense. What we have now is, if I want to do lower level content with a friend or for whatever reason, and I have a lower level weapon that has higher stats, I have to keep it for when I do that lower level stuff.

Even if the base stats were on average 3% per level higher on higher tier weapons, then it would be perfect. (maybe less or more given that compounding can really add up).

Originally Posted by Sparc

For goodness sake I hope nobody thinks to start labelling the console an Xbrick,
oops

the smallness of the game is all thanks to the last-gen support. basically, nothing in the game is something that couldn't all fit into (roughly) 256MB-300MB of RAM from 8 years ago. which means, that my (low-range) 2005 video card could run this game as good as the PS3/360 if it was designed for it. then they sort of upscale the rest.

the problem being there is that you have pretty graphics but the game doesn't feel next-gen, it just feels like an update of a last-gen game. it's not different from the "core design" that it could've been.

the smallness of the game is all thanks to the last-gen support. basically, nothing in the game is something that couldn't all fit into (roughly) 256MB-300MB of RAM from 8 years ago. which means, that my (low-range) 2005 video card could run this game as good as the PS3/360 if it was designed for it. then they sort of upscale the rest.

the problem being there is that you have pretty graphics but the game doesn't feel next-gen, it just feels like an update of a last-gen game. it's not different from the "core design" that it could've been.

I was afraid of this when I heard that this game will also be released for last gen as well, I just had a feeling that this game isn't going to be as big as we first thought. A few planets/moons to explore at the moment and that's about it. When we max out our characters and visit every planet/moon available, the only thing to do would be PVPing. This game should have 100 planets/moons to visit, maybe when Destiny 2 launches we get it.

unless they do some sort of procedural stuff or streaming textures, there's no way they could have a game that wouldn't be possible 8 years ago. so yeah, it's a deal breaker for me. i didn't buy my console to play upgrades. i bought it to play stuff that's not possible on my PS3. that doesn't apply to GTA 5 though XD

unless they do some sort of procedural stuff or streaming textures, there's no way they could have a game that wouldn't be possible 8 years ago. so yeah, it's a deal breaker for me. i didn't buy my console to play upgrades. i bought it to play stuff that's not possible on my PS3. that doesn't apply to GTA 5 though XD

i'm not surprised. years ago i figured next-gen wasn't going to be as popular because people are more and more happy with what they have and graphics/phsics/AI isn't a big deal to them...so without cross-gen titles, next-gen would be in trouble.

unless they do some sort of procedural stuff or streaming textures, there's no way they could have a game that wouldn't be possible 8 years ago. so yeah, it's a deal breaker for me. i didn't buy my console to play upgrades. i bought it to play stuff that's not possible on my PS3. that doesn't apply to GTA 5 though XD

Kinda of two faced w/ GTA5 there I definitely agree this isn't a Next Gen game, but I do feel it's a good end of last gen game from what I've experienced at least, just like AC:BF and Watchdogs were, IMHO. I'm buying it for the Multiplayer Coop Campaign experience. Something which I've really been wanting, Diablo III delivered a bit of it, but not much else outside of MMORPGs, which I really stopped playing a long time ago. FWIW, if I didn't have PS4, I'd be buying it on PS3.

Originally Posted by Omar

i'm not surprised. years ago i figured next-gen wasn't going to be as popular because people are more and more happy with what they have and graphics/phsics/AI isn't a big deal to them...so without cross-gen titles, next-gen would be in trouble.

I was worried about this as well. But I think they've stretched what last gen could do just enough to make it cross gen worthy for many people, and have given us a small taste of what's to come for full current gen games. Bring on AC:U

Kinda of two faced w/ GTA5 there I definitely agree this isn't a Next Gen game, but I do feel it's a good end of last gen game from what I've experienced at least, just like AC:BF and Watchdogs were, IMHO. I'm buying it for the Multiplayer Coop Campaign experience. Something which I've really been wanting, Diablo III delivered a bit of it, but not much else outside of MMORPGs, which I really stopped playing a long time ago. FWIW, if I didn't have PS4, I'd be buying it on PS3.

oh yea i completely agree there. one of the reasons i'm getting GTA 5 is because you could tell it wasn't really designed for last-gen consoles...even though design-wise it is, just about everything else was too taxing on the system.

the game has shadows of just about everything in the entire map...that's unseen in any PS3/360 game out yet! is it not? for a huge game such as GTA5? it blows my mind even today. also you can see details such as muscle (all over the face/body), even the fat rolls on the back of franklin's head! it's all just so insane for last gen.

so i totally agree there, these games wouldn't be out on last-gen anyway if the gen wasn't stretched so long. in a way i think we may have needed it too...because the console business is expensive for everyone (developers/publishers/gamers/makers) so if we don't have cross-plaform games (ports to Vita), we would have a hard time surviving. in the end, a good game doesn't need power to be fun. minecraft proved this again.

and i think destiny is great, it would be my favorite if it was just open world...i somewhat understand why they chose to go this way but i can't get myself excited about it just yet. maybe once i know more, i might change my mind, but playing the beta, i have mixed feelings. though i can certainly tell that it may be one the biggest shooters ever.

I was worried about this as well. But I think they've stretched what last gen could do just enough to make it cross gen worthy for many people, and have given us a small taste of what's to come for full current gen games. Bring on AC:U

yup i think the same. some games are outright sad but others were definitely held back a little for last-gen support but definitely with a next-gen idea.

I was having so much fun with the beta and was considering buying until I tried the crucible missions which are pretty much the online vs matches, and it is awful I did not enjoy it one bit plus there was this guy on some ship with freaking cannons killing everyone, I know that can be sorted with a patch or something in the future. But overall the multiplayer matches ain't fun imo so I decided I'd rather not buy this.

Combat seems a bit repetitive dull. (same can be said for the "missions", Old Russia is getting old)

Enemies (fallen) don't seem to be that interesting, AI is decent.

Traveling to destinations leaves you a bit disconnected (mass effect is superior here)

Ultimately, the big issue is that Destiny is an FPS with rpg elements tacked on. I know people complained about the lack of rpg'ness in mass effect 2, but that still blows destiny out of the water so far.

I'll do some stuff in the crucible and strike missions in the coming days, so far just did story/explore.

I also really hate thralls, they seem to be overpowered and are more annoying than the flood.

Posting Permissions

PlayStation Universe

Copyright 2006-2014 7578768 Canada Inc. All Right Reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written
permission of Abstract Holdings International Ltd. prohibited.Use of this site is governed
by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.